Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 107 F.3d 1235 - Rumpke of Indiana, Inc. v. Cummins Engine Company, Inc.

Rumpke of Indiana, Inc. v. Cummins Engine Company, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

58
cited by 58 later decisions
2
states following
July 2014
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 7 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently July 2014 · most notably Bedford Affiliates v. Sills (1998), New Castle County v. Halliburton NUS Corp. (1997)

13 federal appellate · 7 district · 3 state decisions

280199720002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 33 U.S.C. § 1321 · 42 U.S.C. § 6973 · 42 U.S.C. § 9601 (§ 101 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980) · 42 U.S.C. § 9606 (§ 106 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980) · 42 U.S.C. § 9607 (§ 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980) · 42 U.S.C. § 9613 (§ 113 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980) · 42 U.S.C. § 9622 (§ 122 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980)

Relies on United States v. ITT Continental Baking Co. · United States v. Armour & Co. · Fertel-Rust v. Dane County Social Services · Firefighters Local Union No. 1784 v. Stotts · Key Tronic Corp. v. United States

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “a landowner forced to clean up hazardous materials that a third party spilled onto its property or that migrated there from adjacent lands”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “any other person who is liable or potentially liable.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(We acknowledge, as other courts have, that this seems to provide a disincentive for parties voluntarily to undertake cleanup operations, because a § 106 or § 107(a) action apparently must either be ongoing or already completed before § 113(f)(1) is available. This appears to be what the statute requires, however.)”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.